A meeting of minds?

The defunct anjumans subcommittee of the Federation of the Parsi Zoroastrian Anjumans of India (FPZAI) over the years has generated much controversy but little income.
Even the scheduling of the committees is fraught with politics. A meeting of the committee was fixed for April 25 to discuss the Bhusawal anjuman based in Maharashtra and "land belonging to them.” Sorab Katpitia and Jimmy Bacha who investigate the properties of defunct anjumans on behalf of the FPZAI were to be present. Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) and World Alliance of Parsi Irani Zarthoshtis (WAPIZ) trustee Yazdi Desai in an email addressed to BPP chief executive officer Mehli Colah objected to the meeting being held "at such a ridiculously short notice.” The email intimating the holding of the meeting was sent by Colah on April 24, 2013. Desai along with BPP and WAPIZ trustee Khojeste Mistree and FPZAI vice president West Zone B and WAPIZ trustee Areez Khambatta are at loggerheads with BPP chairman Dinshaw Mehta and BPP trustee Muncherji Cama.
Desai noted that the FPZAI has "officially confirmed and announced a high powered subcommittee of Federation vice presidents, coopted members and a legal advisor for safeguarding Parsi/Irani Zoroastrian properties. This is the second time we are calling such a meeting (on defunct anjumans) without inviting the committee members even after the committee has been appointed, and I am wondering why we are so keen on usurping the authority of this committee.”
Desai suggested the defunct anjuman agenda be rescheduled for May 6 to coincide with a meeting of the new high powered committee and as "the Bhusawal land was being illegally sold … we should invite the residents of Bhusawal too if their matter is being discussed.”

(From left) Dinshaw Mehta, Areez Khambatta and Yazdi Desai: "The Bhusawal episode"

In an email to Colah dated April 24 Mehta countered there was "no need to cancel the meeting as both of them (Katpitia and Bacha) have been called only for the Bhusawal episode. We have already discussed with the residents of Bhusawal and as discussed we have to apply to Bhusawal CC (Charity Commissioner) for further action. So let them come tomorrow.”
Mehta’s reply evoked a lengthy response from Desai dated April 24, 2013 stating, "Dear Mr Mehta… This Bhusawal matter needs a thorough investigation in view of the allegations by the Bhusawal residents that their dakhma land is being sold for Rs 85 lakhs when it is worth Rs 3.5 crores, and that too, without their knowledge.
"From the papers that were emailed to many of us by the residents of Bhusawal, the name of one Rajat Patil (said to be a potential buyer) who seems to be involved in the Bhusawal dakhma land deal is very prominent.
"There is a mail from Maki Kapadia, president of Belgaum Anjuman, sometime in December 2012, with regard to the contentious Dharwar property deal, which also talks of one Rajat Patil in connection with the Dharwar property. The persons from the Federation side involved in both the Dharwar and Bhusawal deals are claiming to be innocent in this illegal sale of Bhusawal property…
"The whole Bhusawal episode is getting murkier and murkier. The secretive, non-transparent, cloak and dagger, political manner in which the affairs are being conducted, no Anjuman will ever be willing to accept the ‘Custodianship of the FPZAI’!!! And even if you forcibly file a scheme the anjumans will use this Bhusawal incident to prove to the court how their property was usurped and illegally sold under the guise of a so-called ‘Custodianship Scheme’!!!
"There is a cloud of suspicion and this matter should not and cannot be swept under the carpet.
"The meeting unilaterally called by you tomorrow is meaningless and unnecessary as there will not be enough ‘independent persons’ present to question the role, if any, played by Katpitia and Bacha and whoever else, in this unholy episode.
"The subcommittee… for safeguarding Parsi/Irani Zoroastrian properties… and some representatives of the Bhusawal anjuman would be the correct forum to investigate into this Bhusawal matter. This committee is meeting on May 6, 2013 and this matter can wait till that time. Already the vigilant residents of Bhusawal have managed to stop the illegal sale of their dakhma land which was possibly perpetrated by persons involved from the Federation side.”
Mehta replied to Desai on April 26, 2013, "Dear Yazdi… Today Katpitia and Bacha denied any proposed sale agreement of any Bhusawal property being made by them. The alleged proposed sale has already been stopped by the Bhusawal residents and we have promised them full support to oppose the sale and agreed to jointly file the scheme. I phoned (Bhusawal anjuman president Dr Nariman) Kavina regarding their grievance and inquired about the inclusion of their names in the proposed scheme pending before the Charity Commissioner as agreed by the residents of Bhusawal when they met me during their visit on April 22 to the BPP office. I was shocked at his reply that as per advice of WAPIZ, the others were not interested as Areez Khambatta… had assured them of full backing and full funding and they were prepared to go in for litigation against the Federation. I explained to him that after loss of WAPIZ candidate (Anahita Desai, wife of Yazdi) to Cama they (WAPIZ trustees) may be vindictive but we have to look at the larger interest of the community and avoid conflict among ourselves but together in cooperation ensure that the proposed sale is opposed. Katpitia informs us that Areez has intervened and objected to the Federation forming such custodial schemes in Deesa, Rajkot and other defunct anjumans. Exactly what is the position is quite confusing in view of WAPIZ and your Khambatta opposing the scheme submitted by the Federation to protect the Bhusawal anjuman property. On April 22, 2013 when Kavina and eight residents of Bhusawal met me in BPP office along with Colah and (BPP executive secretary — welfare) Cawas Panthaky they were quite amicable for jointly filing the scheme after amending the same and to take a further date on April 30, with the Charity Commissioner. However from today’s developments and the disclosure made by Kavina the story is different. Please clarify. Rather than fight and squabble amongst ourselves it is important to work in unison in the larger interest of the moffusil anjumans.”
Mehta’s reply drew an angry response from Khambatta: "It was disgusting to read in your letter addressed to Desai about the Bhusawal episode that you are trying to implicate me, in a mess and blunder, which has been created by you! I have never met or spoken to any Bhusawal Parsis including Kavina. So the question of my assuring them of fighting the Federation on this Bhusawal issue, does not arise…
"In the case of Rajkot, you are playing a similar dirty game…
"You have the audacity of advising Yazdi that ‘Rather than fight and squabble amongst ourselves it is important to work in unison in the larger interest of the moffusil anjumans…’
"Instead of cooking up imaginary stories involving me, behind my back, please keep me present in your next meeting with Bhusawal residents especially with Kavina...and of course Katpitia and Colah, who being employed by you, seem to be doing your bidding. This way, the truth at least has a chance of emerging, instead of being buried under a body of cover-ups and lies. I will appreciate this meeting being held on the same day as our May 6 defunct anjuman meeting so that I don’t have to come to Bombay twice.”
The meeting scheduled for May 6 was subsequently cancelled.